"In fact, if you truly wanted to keep insulin as low as possible, then you wouldn’t eat a high protein diet…you would eat a low protein, low carbohydrate, high fat diet. However, I don’t see anybody recommending that".

this is were the author completely drops the ball. That's what I reckon.

"A study done at Tufts, for example, presented at the 2003 American Heart Association convention, compared four popular diets for a year. They compared Weight Watchers, The Zone Diet, the Atkins Diet (almost no carbs), and the Ornish Diet (almost all carbs) for a year. The insulin levels of those instructedto go on the Ornish diet dropped 27%. Out of the four diets that were compared that year, Ornish’svegetarian diet was the only one to significantly lower the 'Monster' 'Hormone That Makes You Fat,' even though that’s supposedly what Atkins and The Zone diets were designed to do.

Michael Greger, "Atkins Exposed".

"One Year Effectiveness of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone Diets in DecreasingBody Weight and Heart Disease Risk"

I also think James made a mistake there. We have too much evidence that high saturated fat intake induces insulin resistance, which tends to raise insulin levels...and this may explain why people attempting the Ornish approach (less than 10% total fat) had the largest decline in insulin levels when compared to those other approaches.

"We have too much evidence that high saturated fat intake induces insulin resistance, which tends to raise insulin levels..."

This is not my understanding. Fat-induced insulin resistance is physiological, and actually differs from pathological insulin resistance. Peter discusses it here:http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/search/label/Physiological%20insulin%20resistance%20%281%29

In short, your body adapts to a VLC diet by *reducing* insulin levels, so as to make serum glucose more available for uptake by the brain. While different from chronic hyperinsulinemia, it seems the jury is still out as to whether or not it's safe to remain in this state long-term.

Whether fat contributes directly to any kind of insulin resistance is unclear to me. It seems very low carb / ketosis is the necessary condition for it.

Or are you aware of a different mechanism? If so, I'd be interested in any reference you can provide me. Thanks!

"Protein spikes insulin too" sounds good at first, but does not wind up being all that convincing, unfortunately. Dietary protein appears to stimulate glucagon release, which counteracts many of the effects of insulin. Glucagon opposes fat storage, encourages fat release, and opposes insulin-induced reactive hypoglycemia by stimulating glucose release from the liver. (Perhaps glucagon also increases insulin sensitivity? I haven't seen any mention of such though)

Do you still believe that insulin makes people overeat and get fat, and that we have to counteract insulin to prevent fat gain?

If so, you need to read Krieger's full series.

Insulin is NOT the reason people gain fat. You can get and remain fat with low insulin levels, or even if the protein you're eating stimulates glucagon release.

By the way, why does protein ingestion stimulate glucagon release? Only if the protein is excess, in which case the reason glucagon rises is to stimulate conversion of the excess amino acids to glucose! Which then causes a rise in insulin.

In other words, this is the mechanism by which the body converts excess amino acids to glucose, and when this glucose derived from amino acids enters the blood, it will suppress fat burning.

The whole idea that eating excess protein stimulates fat burning by raising glucagon levels is simply false, apparently based on ignorance of the reason a high protein intake stimulates glucagon output.

Takeaway: Increasing the proportion of fat in the diet reduces insulin sensitivity in humans, and the effect is greater (more insulin resistance) the greater the proportion of saturated fats in the diet, but somewhat less if the fats are unsaturated. The best way to increase insulin sensitivity is to reduce total dietary fat, irrespective of type.

I first read Krieger's series (in full) some eight months ago. That's also the time I stopped believing the carb/insulin hypothesis. As of today my own diet is probably > 60% carbs, and I'm eating roasted pumpkin as I type this. So let it be known that I love my carbs :)

That being said, there are some loose ends which I could not resolve. Glucagon was one of them. (Carbs and small-dense LDL is another, if you care to comment on that.)

I hadn't looked into why protein stimulates insulin (or glucagon) in the first place, so thanks for pointing it out. If I understand you correctly, then protein, if not consumed in excess, would trigger neither insulin or glucagon?

It seems like most everybody leans on that one KANWU study connecting saturated fat with insulin resistance. At least 2 of the 3 review papers you cite above rely on it. The actual study showed a small difference between SAFA and MUFA, with only borderline statistical significance at the 5% p-value mark. It would be nice to see additional studies to confirm this data, but if the effect is small it probably doesn't matter anyway in the context of a low-fat diet, as you said. Which is generally how I eat anyway, being of Asian-descent.

Oh yes, I forgot to mention one thing. If high-fat feeding can induce physiological insulin resistance, then the argument goes that it may not be of concern as long as you stick to a low-carb diet. According to Peter @ Hyperlipid, this type of insulin resistance is 100% normal and completely reversible.

My Guide To Time-Restricted Feeding

My book on time-restricted feeding and periodic fasting for health, fat loss and muscle building. Click on image to get the book from Amazon.

Most Published Research Findings Are FALSE

In the August 2005 publication of the online PLOS, John Ioannidis thoroughly explained "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False." He showed that "Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias."

I don't remember when I first read his paper (probably no later than 2010), but I do know that I didn't begin to take him very seriously until about February 2017. Up until then, I thought that I could discover the truth about diet, nutrition and health by sorting through and analyzing published diet and nutrition research, which to say the least presents contradictory findings from different camps with different biases.

In late 2016, after more than 5 years eating an apparently nutrient-dense, high protein vegan diet, I had a blood test that showed that I had significantly low levels of globulin and phosphorus, indicating that I was likely not getting adequate protein or phosphorus from that diet.

Since then, I have worked on ridding myself of the belief that published diet and nutrition "science" or research is credible by virtue of its publication. I have worked on switching to relying on my own direct experience and senses of need, preference, taste, and satisfaction to guide my food choices. I am hoping to help others do the same.

If I could relay only one message from this point forward it would be: DON'T PUT YOUR FAITH IN SCIENCE AND DON'T RELY ON AUTHORITIES. BECOME SELF-RELIANT AND AUTONOMOUS.

Disclaimer

At one time I used this blog to explore and support the theory and practice of modernized, highly animal-based paleo and low-carb diets.

As I evolved, I became a paleo-diet heretic, and this blog became an exploration and presentation of the evidence values that support the practice of a whole foods plant-based diet.

Everything changes, and my experience, knowledge and understanding are no exception. In short, I have found the weaknesses and faults in plant-based ideology and practice as well.

I have tried to digest and assimilate the apparently conflicting information coming from the opposite ends of the diet debates (meat-based and high-fat vs. plant-based high-carbohydrate).

I have incorporated that new information into my world view and perspective and in the process revealed and corrected my errors when necessary.

The Chinese sage Chuang Tzu observed: "Tao is obscured when men understand only one pair of opposites, or concentrate only on a partial aspect of being. Then clear expression also becomes muddled by mere wordplay, affirming this one aspect and denying all the rest. The pivot of Tao passes through the center where all affirmations and denials converge. He who grasps the pivot is at the still-point from which all movements and oppositions can be seen in their right relationship... Abandoning all thought of imposing a limit or taking sides, he rests in direct intuition. "

Through understanding and experimenting with the dietary opposites, in late February 2017 I came to an understanding of the still-point between the extremes and the role of "intuition" from one's True Nature in solving the apparent dilemma.

About Me

I am a member of MENSA who has not always made smart choices. I have a master's degree in philosophy, and do my best to pursue truth and virtue. I have made mistakes in public, and have not been afraid to admit it. I believe that if I'm not making mistakes, I'm not learning or growing or living fully. Like Thoreau, I believe that "life is an experiment to a great extent untried," and that a philosopher should show by example a better way of life, not just spout doctrines and arguments. I value freedom and abhor slavery. I have a master's degree in Oriental medicine and the course work equivalent of a bachelor's degree in nutrition. I seek health, fitness, and longevity through self-discipline in physical training and food. In short, I practice macrobiotics: philosophy, freedom, fitness, and food. Hopefully others can learn from my successes and my mistakes.